Anti-Turkism, also known as Turcophobia

[-SINAN-]

I didn’t say that they were not Turks, I said that it wasn’t an Turkish empire.

Even if ruled by Turks, the empire could be based on nationalistic, religious or ethnic identity.
Ottoman was religious if you ask me.

You can be open and speak to your hearts content as we don't have mod in our section anymore.

 

[Doritos11]

You can be open and speak to your hearts content as we don't have mod in our section anymore.

I’m not here to troll .


Previous Islamic empires before the Ottoman such as, Ummayad, Abbasid were ruled by Arabs.
I don’t consider those Arab empires, it wasn’t nationalistic rule neither was Ottoman.

 

[Alienoz_TR]

I’m not here to troll .


Previous Islamic empires before the Ottoman such as, Ummayad, Abbasid were ruled by Arabs.
I don’t consider those Arab empires, it wasn’t nationalistic rule neither was Ottoman.

I wasnt here for a long time. But i remember you were partially of Turkmen origin, right?

Well till 1514, Chaldyran war, Ottomans didnt have Kurds. And till 1516-17, the collapse of Circassian Mamelukes, Ottomans didnt have Arab population. First two centuries of the empire was Turkic. With the conquests, it eventually turned into more cosmopolitan society. I can talk about Sunni Islamic Empire after 1500's with the Caliphate.

Anyway, after French revolution, the idea of nationalism and national awareness have risen among Ottomans whether Türks, Arabs, Kurds, Greeks or Armenians, you name it. The core lands of Empire did stay as Turkic.

And what is Turk? The sons and daughters of the conquerors and locals. I might add.

 

[-SINAN-]

I’m not here to troll .


Previous Islamic empires before the Ottoman such as, Ummayad, Abbasid were ruled by Arabs.
I don’t consider those Arab empires, it wasn’t nationalistic rule neither was Ottoman.

I wonder what Al-hasani would think about this.

 

[al-Hasani]

@Doritos11

The Rashidun, Umayyad, Fatimid and Abbasid Caliphates were Islamic empires ruled by Arabs where Arab culture, language, Islam etc. was spread widely.

The Ottoman Caliphate was a Turkish Islamic empire although it was heavily influenced by previous Arab caliphates.

Nothing wrong with calling it a Turkish Islamic Caliphate in this day and time.

Just like there is nothing wrong with calling the Rashidun, Umayyad, Fatimid and Abbasid Caliphates as Arab Islamic empires.

But all those caliphates were different and some were more nationalistic than others but the main foundation was Islam for all. It was from Islam that their legitimacy derived from. At the same time they were multi-ethnic and multi-religious caliphates.

 

[-SINAN-]

The Rashidun, Umayyad, Fatimid and Abbasid Caliphates were Islamic empires ruled by Arabs where Arab culture, language, Islam etc. was spread widely.

By coincidence, i have researched these subjects a little bit. And learned that Shias don't accept 3 caliphs before Ali.

Is this the root of Arab vs Iranian conflict ?

 

[al-Hasani]

By coincidence, i have researched these subjects a little bit. And learned that Shias don't accept 3 caliphs before Ali.

Is this the root of Arab vs Iranian conflict ?

No, that has nothing to do with Iranians. It was an internal Arab conflict. The Battle of Karbala that made the split of Islam into Sunni Islam and Shia Islam was an internal struggle for power. The Caliphate.

More precisely it was the Umayyad Caliphate exemplified with Yazid I against people loyal to Husayn ibn Ali (ra) who was the grandson of Prophet Muhammad (saws).

Battle of Karbala - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is quite complicated. It is probably the most controversial/most discussed incident in Islamic history.

Persians were mostly Sunni Muslims until the Safavids forcibly converted their population to Shia Islam through forced conversions, massacres and by importing Shia Arab clergy from Lebanon, Iraq, Eastern Province of KSA etc. less than 500 years ago. Meaning nearly 1000 years AFTER the Battle of Karbala.

Safavid conversion of Iran to Shia Islam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some say that it was a political move to distinguish themselves from the Ottomans who were Sunni Muslims and rivals as you and most Turks probably know.

 

[-SINAN-]

No, that has nothing to do with Iranians. It was an internal Arab conflict. The Battle of Karbala that made the split of Islam into Sunni Islam and Shia Islam was an internal struggle for power. The Caliphate.

More precisely it was the Umayyad Caliphate exemplified with Yazid I against people loyal to Husayn ibn Ali (ra) who was the grandson of Prophet Muhammad (saws).

Battle of Karbala - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mate, i heard about Yazid before.... Like no one names his children after Yazid or the most hated person in Islamic history. This Yazid who killed Ali, is that Yazid right ?

It is quite complicated. It is probably the most controversial/most discussed incident in Islamic history.

Persians were mostly Sunni Muslims until the Safavids forcibly converted their population to Shia Islam through forced conversions, massacres and by importing Shia Arab clergy from Lebanon, Iraq, Eastern Province of KSA etc. less than 500 years ago. Meaning nearly 1000 years AFTER the Battle of Karbala.

Safavid conversion of Iran to Shia Islam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Some say that it was a political move to distinguish themselves from the Ottomans who were Sunni Muslims and rivals as you and most Turks probably know.

Thanks for again for the detailed post.

As you know, i like the hear both sides opinions about the subject. So, i asked to my Iranian buddies if the "Arab vs Iranian" thing started kith Kerbela incident.

They said "no, it's started with this" Battle of al-Qādisiyyah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Do you also think the same ?

 

[Doritos11]

The Ottoman Caliphate was a Turkish Islamic empire although it was heavily influenced by previous Arab caliphates.
Nothing wrong with calling it a Turkish Islamic Caliphate in this day and time.

Turkish Islamic empire & Arab Islamic empire is different than Turkish or Arab empire, with the word Islamic in it you don’t exclude the other groups so that’s possible.

I wasnt here for a long time. But i remember you were partially of Turkmen origin, right?

yes mothers side

Well till 1514, Chaldyran war, Ottomans didnt have Kurds. And till 1516-17, the collapse of Circassian Mamelukes, Ottomans didnt have Arab population. First two centuries of the empire was Turkic. With the conquests, it eventually turned into more cosmopolitan society. I can talk about Sunni Islamic Empire after 1500's with the Caliphate.

Anyway, after French revolution, the idea of nationalism and national awareness have risen among Ottomans whether Türks, Arabs, Kurds, Greeks or Armenians, you name it. The core lands of Empire did stay as Turkic.

And what is Turk? The sons and daughters of the conquerors and locals. I might add.

I mean the era when the Ottoman empire was at it’s largest around 1500 as you said, not the beginning which always starts small locally.

 

[Ahiska]

Ottoman empire is and always will be a Turco-Islamic empire

 

[xenon54 out]

@WebMaster @Aeronaut can you deal with this indian troll pls?

 

[Kompromat]

Done..

 

[Shah9]

The Arabs here keep denying the fact Ottoman ruled the Middle East and North Africa. They think Arabs ruled their territory when Ottoman Empire exist.

They need to STFU and accept the fact Turkish caliphs and sultans ruled the Arabs shortly after when Islam was spread in Turkey and the conquest of Constantipole. ALL the years until the British came and divide the Middle East.

So I call that Turcophobia when they deny Turks ruled Arab countries.

 

[Pakistanisage]

I think most of us Pakistanis suffer from " Turco-Philia " which means extreme affinity for Turkish People.